Resumen de “Hobby Lobby, S.A.S.”, and the resolution of religion-based conflicts in liberal states
Two recent high profile cases on both sides of the ocean, Burwell v. Hobby Lobby in the USA, and S.A.S. v. France in Europe, have brought to the forefront, yet again, the difficulty in resolving religion-based conflicts in liberal states. While in many important senses these two cases and their outcomes are fundamentally different, and even contradictory, this article will highlight two important similarities between these cases, which may indicate a shift in the mode of resolution of some religion-based conflicts in liberal states. First, while in both cases the courts held that the basis for their decisions was the protection of rights (in Hobby Lobby—the rights of the petitioning religious employers, in S.A.S.—the rights of the public at large), in both cases the courts are in fact protecting the offended religious/anti-religious feelings of dominant groups and engaging in legal moralism, while condoning a violation of the basic rights of a disempowered minority (in Hobby Lobby—women employees who wish to use contraceptives; in S.A.S.—women who wear the full-face veil). Second, in both cases the disempowered groups whose rights are restricted are women and the right that is restricted is their autonomy over their body. This article argues that this is not accidental, since control over women’s bodies is central to both religious and state authority, and both religious and state actors devalue women’s right to make autonomous decisions regarding their bodies.
